|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Playerview vs. GT++
I am currently using GT++ and am wondering if there is any merit to moving to Playerview. I play on Stars if that makes any difference (shouldn't I'm guessing).
Does anyone here have experience with both and an opinion on which is best? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playerview vs. GT++
I like Playerview a lot more. I can customize exactly what I want, it's less cumbersome and takes up less screen space. I feel like it works better, and it has the holecards from the last hand's showdown feature which is really cool.
I use GT++ for about 2 days when PV went pay, hated it, and stopped being cheap and just paid for PV. So worth it. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playerview vs. GT++
[ QUOTE ]
it has the holecards from the last hand's showdown feature [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I saw this in another thread (which prompted this question). Didn't realize it was not free anymore [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] Thanks for the replies guys. I'll check out their free version (hoping there is a trial out there) and will make a decision after that. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playerview vs. GT++
I don't think there's $50 difference, but I like PV better and use GT+.
-d |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playerview vs. GT++
I used GT+ until I moved to 8 tables... Then it started to lag, so I shelled out the cash for PV.
PV >>> GT+, IMO. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playerview vs. GT++
There's another alternative being developed that's similar to PlayerView, but it's free. It's still early in development, but it works pretty well.
Here's a thread on it: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...o=&fpart=1 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playerview vs. GT++
Also... how many tables do you play?
If its 1-3, I would guess that PV is not worth the 50. Or at least, I would not be willing to pay it. But, as you add tables, the holecards, plus the automatic table lookup, plus the less CPU use make it well worth it. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playerview vs. GT++
I play 2 tables (very rarely 3) and IMO Playerview is worth the $50. The "hotspot" feature in PV is also very valuable since I want access to most stats (like blindsteal stats, individual street aggression, etc.) but don't want to clutter up my board too much and I call on those stats relatively infrequently. I know that many balked at $50 when PokerTracker is $55, but just MHO. YMMV. Can't think of another acronym . . .
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playerview vs. GT++
[ QUOTE ]
I play 2 tables (very rarely 3) and IMO Playerview is worth the $50. The "hotspot" feature in PV is also very valuable since I want access to most stats (like blindsteal stats, individual street aggression, etc.) but don't want to clutter up my board too much and I call on those stats relatively infrequently. I know that many balked at $50 when PokerTracker is $55, but just MHO. YMMV. Can't think of another acronym . . . [/ QUOTE ] Thats a good point I have the hotspot thing turned off because there is absolutely no way I could use it, but yeah, I'd imagine that would be really helpful for 1-3 tablers. (probably a bit higher too) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playerview vs. GT++
[ QUOTE ]
Also... how many tables do you play? If its 1-3, I would guess that PV is not worth the 50. Or at least, I would not be willing to pay it. But, as you add tables, the holecards, plus the automatic table lookup, plus the less CPU use make it well worth it. [/ QUOTE ] I'm thinking of making the switch now. Jordan, do you think it will be worth it when PE has their stats going on the tables? Just curious because they're almost done. I think I'll wait to see what I'll be missing. |
|
|